The Dahiya Doctrine: Israel's military doctrine of mass civilian casualties

[Nomad4Ever]

The massive destruction of infrastructure and flattening of entire neighborhood blocks isn't incidental; it is an integral part of Israeli military doctrine. The Dahiya Doctrine is named after a village in Lebanon that militants launched rockets from into Israel in 2006. The Israeli response was disproportionate by design. The entire village was flattened and most of the casualties were civilians.

This was the deliberate application of “disproportionate force”, such as the destruction of an entire village, if deemed to be the source of rocket fire. One graphic description of the result was that “around a thousand Lebanese civilians were killed, a third of them children. Towns and villages were reduced to rubble; bridges, sewage treatment plants, port facilities and electric power plants were crippled or destroyed.” (source)

A quote from a senior Israeli general speaking about the doctrine;

'We will wield disproportionate power against every village from which shots are fired on Israel, and cause immense damage and destruction. From our perspective, these are military bases... This isn't a suggestion. This is a plan that has already been authorized.' - General Gadi Eisenkot

'With an outbreak of hostilities [with Hezbollah], the IDF will need to act immediately, decisively, and with force that is disproportionate to the enemy's actions and the threat it poses. Such a response aims at inflicting damage and meting out punishment to an extent that will demand long and expensive reconstruction processes. - General Gadi Eisenkot

(source)

This all seems rather unambiguous as far as I am concerned. He directly says Israeli military treats towns and cities from which rockets are fired as military bases, a blatant war crime.

This doctrine has been seen in basically every Israeli response sense 2006. Operation Cast Lead played out like a smaller scale version of the current conflict, with independent orgs estimating 65% of the casualties were civilian and entire villages were destroyed.

A U.N.-commissioned report regarding that conflict, which saw the deaths of more than 1,400 Palestinians and Israelis, determined that Israel’s campaign was “a deliberately disproportionate attack designed to punish, humiliate and terrorize a civilian population, radically diminish its local economic capacity both to work and to provide for itself, and to force upon it an ever increasing sense of dependency and vulnerability.” (source)

the aegis of Tel Aviv University’s Institute for National Security Studies that argued the necessary response to militant provocations from Lebanon, Syria or Gaza were “disproportionate” strikes that aim only secondarily to hit the enemy’s capacity to launch rockets or other attacks. Rather, the goal should be to inflict lasting damage, no matter the civilian consequences, as a future deterrent. (Source)

In an interview with the spokesman for the IDF in the current conflict, he plainly said the response was focused on "damage and not accuracy". And so far the IDF has been operating as it has in the past. Intentionally using disproportionate force, destroying as much infrastructure as possible, cutting off water and power, leveling entire neighborhoods, all as a means of deterrence to punish not just the militants but the civilian population as well.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

No doubt there will be people who claim somehow that even directly quoting the things Israeli officials are openly saying is somehow me supporting Hamas.

This is not an argument against Israel's "right to self defense". As I have stated from the start of this conflict I support the IDF in their anti-terrorist operations. What I do not support is how they are going about it and the continued support of their tactics. When the US supports countries like Israel or Saudi Arabia in their destructive military campaigns it weakens our global credibility and is a slap in the face to the victims of the violence.

 

[TheParser]

Maybe the Israelis know the psychology of the Arabs better than any other group.

So I guess that -- according to the info in the OP -- the Israelis feel that their current massive response in Gaza is the only "language" their enemies understand.

So all Arab nations (and Iran) had better watch their p's and q's.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

So I guess that -- according to the info in the OP -- the Israelis feel that their current massive response in Gaza is the only "language" their enemies understand.

So all Arab nations (and Iran) had better watch their p's and q's.

I have no doubt that is their perspective on it. I expect they would say it is a "peace through strength" kind of strategy.

 

[ttwtt78640]

No doubt there will be people who claim somehow that even directly quoting the things Israeli officials are openly saying is somehow me supporting Hamas.

This is not an argument against Israel's "right to self defense". As I have stated from the start of this conflict I support the IDF in their anti-terrorist operations. What I do not support is how they are going about it and the continued support of their tactics. When the US supports countries like Israel or Saudi Arabia in their destructive military campaigns it weakens our global credibility and is a slap in the face to the victims of the violence.

How would you suggest one nation go about responding to rocket attacks coming from within another nation (or ’proxy’ forces within it funded by a third nation)?

 

[Bok Tuklo]

It's like Ardeatine only not as fussy about exact numbers.

​

 

[Nomad4Ever]

How would you suggest one nation go about responding to rocket attacks coming from within another nation (or ’proxy’ forces within it funded by a third nation)?

Astoundingly the US offers a pretty good example of targeted strikes against insurgents. Just look at how we have responded to the Iran backed militias firing rockets into US bases over the past few weeks.

Precision guided munitions destroyed their rocket launchers, killed several militants, and there have been no reported civilian casualties I'm aware of, despite these groups also operating out of towns and villages as human shields.

Hell, when we killed Soleimani we developed a special rocket with ****ing BLADES and killed ONLY HIM when he was in a densely populated civilian area.

 

[Bok Tuklo]

Astoundingly the US offers a pretty good example of targeted strikes against insurgents. Just look at how we have responded to the Iran backed militias firing rockets into US bases over the past few weeks.

Precision guided munitions destroyed their rocket launchers, killed several militants, and there have been no reported civilian casualties I'm aware of, despite these groups also operating out of towns and villages as human shields.

Hell, when we killed Soleimani we developed a special rocket with ****ing BLADES and killed ONLY HIM when he was in a densely populated civilian area.

 

[ttwtt78640]

Astoundingly the US offers a pretty good example of targeted strikes against insurgents. Just look at how we have responded to the Iran backed militias firing rockets into US bases over the past few weeks.

Yep, about 6 counter attacks for about 75 attacks.

Precision guided munitions destroyed their rocket launchers, killed several militants, and there have been no reported civilian casualties I'm aware of, despite these groups also operating out of towns and villages as human shields.

Hell, when we killed Soleimani we developed a special rocket with ****ing BLADES and killed ONLY HIM when he was in a densely populated civilian area.

OK, but did those counter attacks stop the attacks?

 

[Tigerace117]

Yep, about 6 counter attacks for about 75 attacks.



OK, but did those counter attacks stop the attacks?

Has Israel’s doctrine stopped terrorist attacks?

(Here’s a hint: the answer is a pretty unequivocal “no”).

 

[Apocalypse]

Astoundingly the US offers a pretty good example of targeted strikes against insurgents. Just look at how we have responded to the Iran backed militias firing rockets into US bases over the past few weeks.

Precision guided munitions destroyed their rocket launchers, killed several militants, and there have been no reported civilian casualties I'm aware of, despite these groups also operating out of towns and villages as human shields.

Hell, when we killed Soleimani we developed a special rocket with ****ing BLADES and killed ONLY HIM when he was in a densely populated civilian area.

You're picking different scenarios and comparing apples to oranges to present the US as angels and Israelis as devils in their conduct while the two nations manage themselves a bit of the same way (only Israel has a bigger spotlight on it and thus goes to greater measures).

IDF also uses that "missile with the ****ing blades" when conducting targeted strikes. It can't use it however to bring down tunnels and to destroy terrorist infrastructure.
The Iranians in Syria and Iraq are also not using human shields as far as I'm aware, they're mostly out there in the open or in Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah bases.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

OK, but did those counter attacks stop the attacks?

No, but our 20 years playing in the sand in the middle east didn't either. We wiped terror group after terror group off the face of the earth. Toppled nations and spent trillions propping up new governments in their place.

Almost like military force is good for nation states vs nation states, but is utterly useless when it comes to long term peace and stability.

 

[ataraxia]

The massive destruction of infrastructure and flattening of entire neighborhood blocks isn't incidental; it is an integral part of Israeli military doctrine. The Dahiya Doctrine is named after a village in Lebanon that militants launched rockets from into Israel in 2006. The Israeli response was disproportionate by design. The entire village was flattened and most of the casualties were civilians.


A quote from a senior Israeli general speaking about the doctrine;


(source)

This all seems rather unambiguous as far as I am concerned. He directly says Israeli military treats towns and cities from which rockets are fired as military bases, a blatant war crime.

This doctrine has been seen in basically every Israeli response sense 2006. Operation Cast Lead played out like a smaller scale version of the current conflict, with independent orgs estimating 65% of the casualties were civilian and entire villages were destroyed.



In an interview with the spokesman for the IDF in the current conflict, he plainly said the response was focused on "damage and not accuracy". And so far the IDF has been operating as it has in the past. Intentionally using disproportionate force, destroying as much infrastructure as possible, cutting off water and power, leveling entire neighborhoods, all as a means of deterrence to punish not just the militants but the civilian population as well.

Maybe it's designed to make civilians more resistant next time some terrorist group wants to set up a command and control center in their local grocery store, hospital, or elementary school.

 

[ataraxia]

Has Israel’s doctrine stopped terrorist attacks?

(Here’s a hint: the answer is a pretty unequivocal “no”).

It's like law enforcement: crime will always be there. Doesn't mean you stop law enforcement activities.

 

[Apocalypse]

The massive destruction of infrastructure and flattening of entire neighborhood blocks isn't incidental; it is an integral part of Israeli military doctrine. The Dahiya Doctrine is named after a village in Lebanon that militants launched rockets from into Israel in 2006. The Israeli response was disproportionate by design. The entire village was flattened and most of the casualties were civilians.


A quote from a senior Israeli general speaking about the doctrine;


(source)

This all seems rather unambiguous as far as I am concerned. He directly says Israeli military treats towns and cities from which rockets are fired as military bases, a blatant war crime.

This doctrine has been seen in basically every Israeli response sense 2006. Operation Cast Lead played out like a smaller scale version of the current conflict, with independent orgs estimating 65% of the casualties were civilian and entire villages were destroyed.



In an interview with the spokesman for the IDF in the current conflict, he plainly said the response was focused on "damage and not accuracy". And so far the IDF has been operating as it has in the past. Intentionally using disproportionate force, destroying as much infrastructure as possible, cutting off water and power, leveling entire neighborhoods, all as a means of deterrence to punish not just the militants but the civilian population as well.

That's not entirely accurate. It's a statement Eizenkot, then a general in the military overseeing Israel's northern border, has made in 2008, two years after the 2nd Lebanon war of 2006, referring to what the lessons from that war are. Most will say it was a statement made to deter Hezbollah from going back to hostilities against Israel. But there's not much wrong with the statement either, there's no proportionality in war and if a place is made a military base by the enemy government then it shall be treated as such, while civilians still should not be targeted, it's entirely sensible to destroy buildings used to launch rockets at Israeli children and remove the ability to use them as such. You claimed it's named after the Dahieh "village" (it's a neighborhood in Beirut most associated with Hezbollah terror group) being flattened, it wasn't flattened though.

 

[Nomad4Ever]

You're picking different scenarios and comparing apples to oranges to present the US as angels and Israelis as devils in their conduct while the two nations manage themselves a bit of the same way (only Israel has a bigger spotlight on it and thus goes to greater measures).

IDF also uses that "missile with the ****ing blades" when conducting targeted strikes. It can't use it however to bring down tunnels and to destroy terrorist infrastructure.
The Iranians in Syria and Iraq are also not using human shields as far as I'm aware, they're mostly out there in the open or in Syrian/Iranian/Hezbollah bases.

I hardly meant to present the US military or our military responses to terror attacks broadly as good. I've written a good few threads on here going over our various war crimes.

I was only contrasting the horrible US military to the even worse IDF.

When they hit the Jabalia refugee camp they said it was to kill a Hamas commander. Only they struck the camp with a JDAM and took out about 50 civilians along with him. Then they hit the camp with like 3-4 more JDAMs just to be sure they got him I guess. Seems like the perfect time to use those blade missiles to reduce collateral damage.

Regardless, the main point of the thread is the Dahiya Doctrine. What is your opinion on that? Do you think the quotes are taken out of context, or maybe that the doctrine is justified?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

Maybe it's designed to make civilians more resistant next time some terrorist group wants to set up a command and control center in their local grocery store, hospital, or elementary school.

Hasn't been working too great then. Maybe they just haven't killed enough civilians? I'm sure this time leveling entire cities and perpetuating generational poverty won't act as a recruiting tool and radicalize young adults who grow up in the rubble.

 

[Tigerace117]

It's like law enforcement: crime will always be there. Doesn't mean you stop law enforcement activities.

Police brutality does nothing to stop crime, and the people who pretend it does are idiots.

 

[ataraxia]

Police brutality does nothing to stop crime, and the people who pretend it does are idiots.

I wasn't talking about police brutality. I was talking about legitimate law enforcement. You think the fact that crime continues despite it means we should just give up on it?

 

[Nomad4Ever]

But there's not much wrong with the statement either, there's no proportionality in war and if a place is made a military base by the enemy government then it shall be treated as such, while civilians still should not be targeted, it's entirely sensible to destroy buildings used to launch rockets at Israeli children and remove the ability to use them as such.

They aren't talking about destroying buildings used to launch rockets. They are specifically and clearly saying to destroy everything in the area regardless of if it was used to launch rockets.

That is unequivocally what he is saying and we have clearly seen the IDF go with this tactic in basically every anti-terror operation since 2006.

 

[Apocalypse]

I hardly meant to present the US military or our military responses to terror attacks broadly as good. I've written a good few threads on here going over our various war crimes.

I was only contrasting the horrible US military to the even worse IDF.

IDF isn't worse than US though in safeguarding civilians, that's not supported by the evidence or the tactics used.

When they hit the Jabalia refugee camp they said it was to kill a Hamas commander.

To kill the commander, 50 of his militants and the entire Hamas Jabaliya brigade command with its underground infrastructure.
Using a GBU-31 bomb that explodes deep in the ground and creates less damage above ground.
I understand the tunnel was destroyed and collapsed with it a vast underground infrastructure built around it and with it several nearby buildings had collapsed as well.
That hardly seems like a reckless behavior from the IDF POV. It's a result of Hamas' behavior. I'm also not sure how many civilians compared to how many militants were killed there.

Only they struck the camp with a JDAM and took out about 50 civilians along with him.

I think you're mistaken here, 50 is the number of terrorists we know died with him, Hamas I believe has claimed "200 civilians have died" not mentioning any militant as usual.

Then they hit the camp with like 3-4 more JDAMs

That I'm not aware of.

just to be sure they got him I guess. Seems like the perfect time to use those blade missiles to reduce collateral damage.

He died underground. Blades don't go through the ground.

Regardless, the main point of the thread is the Dahiya Doctrine. What is your opinion on that? Do you think the quotes are taken out of context, or maybe that the doctrine is justified?

I think it's justified as long as it doesn't go after civilians and only goes after the buildings used by the terrorists.

 

[Tigerace117]

I wasn't talking about police brutality. I was talking about legitimate law enforcement. You think the fact that crime continues despite it means we should just give up on it?

And I pointed out that law enforcement tactics which are overtly brutal— like Israel‘s Dahiya Doctrine— flat out do not work.

 

[Apocalypse]

They aren't talking about destroying buildings used to launch rockets. They are specifically and clearly saying to destroy everything in the area regardless of if it was used to launch rockets.

That is unequivocally what he is saying and we have clearly seen the IDF go with this tactic in basically every anti-terror operation since 2006.

If that is true then why are there still many buildings standing in Gaza, since we know everywhere there is used by Hamas as a base of operations?

By the way exactly on the subject of your thread, IDF just released this:

 

[Nomad4Ever]

I think it's justified as long as it doesn't go after civilians and only goes after the buildings used by the terrorists.

As I said already, the quotes clearly outline specifically going after buildings not used by terrorists with the goal being massive destruction and collective punishment of the population as a deterrence for future hostile actions. That is stated very clearly.

 

[Individual]

Maybe the Israelis know the psychology of the Arabs better than any other group.

So I guess that -- according to the info in the OP -- the Israelis feel that their current massive response in Gaza is the only "language" their enemies understand.

So all Arab nations (and Iran) had better watch their p's and q's.

It would appear Hamas is made up of extremely slow learners. Forewarned is forearmed, civilians should run as fast as they can when they see Hamas entering where they live.